is to continue to work with our iraqi hosts and partners to get off the smg threat because it threatens them as well. >> okay, yield back. >> general mckenzie, excellent testimony we appreciate it very much as we stated at the beginning of this hearing. we're going to go downtown to-- svc217 for a closed session. we'll see who shows up. all right? we are adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> if you miss any of our live coverage of the government's response to the coronavirus outbreak, watch it anytime at c-span.org/coronavirus, for daily briefings by the white house and the task force, and hardest hit states. use the charts and map to track the global spread and confirmed cases in the u.s. county by county. our coronavirus web page is your fast and easy way to watch c-span's unfiltered coverage of

this pandemic. up next, a senate hearing on bipartisan legislation aimed at eliminating child sexual exploitation on the internet. >> good morning. thank you all for attending this, what i think is going to be a very important hearing and senator blumenthal, i want to thank you for the hard work you've put into drafting this piece of legislation. senator feinstein is on the way. she said it would be okay if we got started. i normally don't say a whole lot in opening statements, but i might take a bit of time today. i want to introduce into the record my full statement. i'll introduce into the record, without objection. and kindly remind people what brought us here today. in july we had a hearing about

sexual exploitation of children, social media applications, technical companies having data about child exploitation and i'm trying to find a way to childproof the systems and make sure innovation continues and that the people in the business know what they need to do to earn liability protection when it comes to preventing sexual exploretation of children. section 230 was passed years ago, which basically gives blanket immunity to the tech companies, social media sites that are subject to this hearing to make sure they could get started, grow and flourish. that has been accomplished. now, it is time for us as a nation, to figure out about how to rein in some of the problems associated with these industries. number one, i've come to

conclude that the technical systems available today have been-- are dream come true for child predators, that for every good thing that's happened with the internet for lack of a better term, there are dark forces that need to be dealt with and what i've done with senator blumenthal is come up with a system to create best business practices for companies in the arena to follow and if they follow these best business practices, they can keep their 2:30 label protection and the reason we're here with a different approach is because senator blumenthal and myself believe the current system is not working. in the july hearing, the regulatory and system in place is simply not working. it's become in the mind of many a joke. the national center for missing and exploited children, also

known as nncmc. and when it was first started, by 2014, 1.1 million reports in a year. 2019, there were almost 17 million reports to the tipline in a single year. the 2019 reports included more than 69 million images, videos, and files related to child exploitation. there was a particular increase in video last year of the files reported, 41 million of the 69 million were videos. a 23-year-old daycare worker pleaded guilty to child exploitation and child pornography and was sentenced to 30 years in prison. she sexually abused a five-year-old child and filmed the abuse, shared the abuse material mainly using an app

called kick with men she met through other apps and forms, including craig's list. a 23-year-old man sexually abused a 16-month-old toddler. he took photos and videos and shared them on an app, he said he chose the toddler because she doesn't communicate her abuse. section 230 has failed in my view to incentivize the companies in question to do a better job dealing with this horrific problem. the company reports of child sexual exploitation to the cyber tip line. social media companies reports in 2019 out of the total 16.9 million reports to the cyber tip line, facebook was 15.8 million. so the people at facebook, thank you, you're doing a pretty good job. doing a good job. twitter, 46,000, snapchat

82,000. apple, amazon eight. and 205 for apple. so something is wrong here. i am not convinced that all the problems are on the facebook system. i'm convinced that other people are not finding what facebook is able to find if you look and here is the question for the country, should we be looking? should the companies in question be looking and reporting? the answer is yes. what roles do adults have in protecting the children of one society? what role do politicians have in aiding parents to protect their children from sexual exploitation? what is the duty to allow commerce to grow unimpeded to the highest and best use? all of these are things that we're grappling with, but let me tell you where i'm coming

down. i'm coming down on the side of looking and trying to find out and put these bastards in jail and stop it. i'm on the side of parents who really don't have the tools at home. it's just too complicated for any set of parents, a single parent or anybody to protect their child. you need help. what's the role of the congress? to provide the help. to find a balance between busine business, free thought and expression and protecting children who are being filmed daily, their abuse and everybody who watches it who part of the eabuse. this has got to stop. you'll never stamp it out. it's been around as long as man has been around, but the technologies today have created a explosin explosion in terms ol

exploitation of children, being widely viewed and shared and it's now time for us to do something. i've had lunches, i've had dinners, i've talked, i have begged and pleaded. my good friend senator wyden we've talked, i'm tired of talking, we are going to start voting. ... if you do you are home free. if you don't, you run the risk of going to court may view when, maybe don't. this is the only area in society i know where you have absolute blanket protection. and it made sense back then, it doesn't make sense now,

particularly in this area. so what is the other chart? this one here. this is where the reporting is come from. 15 billion reports by facebook. google 449,000. amazon eight, apple 205. clearly facebook is looking and finding something. other people are not looking for or -- it's there. you just have to look pics of facebook is talking about into into encryption which means they go blind. this bill is not about the encryption debate but the best business practices i'm trying to find out what they should be. and the congress under our bill has to approve them for them to become the law of the land. so were having the attorney

general with other cabinet official to set up a commission, 19 people, to try to figure out what are the best ways to protect children from sexual exploitation. and it being shared with millions and billions and billions of people and regulating these sites. and once the commission has decided what to do, congress has to approve it before the companies in question this dece whether or not they want to embrace these practices. it's bipartisan. i've got ten cosponsors. i think if we voted with get a lot of votes. my goal is to fix the problem, understanding the complexity of it, not to put anybody out of business and not to stop innovation, but to do something about the fact that children, on

a massive scale, are being abused by groups of individuals, and the abuse is being shared to millions of people, which incentivizes the abuse. so senator blumenthal, thank you for working with me to come up with a balanced approach that gives us off the sidelines as a nation. i will end with this. i am not going to stay on the sidelines any longer. facebook is doing a damn good job of finding out sexual abuse on their platform and they are reporting it, and prosecutors are acting. the other sites, not so much. we're not going to go blind as a nation. we are not going to go blind and let this abuse go forward in the name of any other freedom.

any society that fails to protect its children, and do all this within reason to do so, has lost their way. america is not going to lose its way. senator blumenthal. >> thank you, senator graham. i want to thank you for the very powerful statement, it even more so for the profoundly important work that you have done and your leadership on this bill has been invaluable. i want to thank also our colleagues on this site and the other side. this bill as you mentioned is truly bipartisan. we are joined by senators white house and feinstein and durbin on decide and senators hawley and ernst on your side. and hope we will be joined by

many others, because the more people understand what's at stake here, the force of this effort is simply indisputable. and i want to pay tribute to the survivors and their families who have come forward. the strength and courage it takes to be the face and voice of this problem is simply unimaginable. anyone who has seen these photos and images has to be absolutely repulsed. you won't see them here. we have charts, what those images are gutwrenching, file, unspeakable in their cruelty and their betrayal of basic humanity.

so we are here about values, about basic human decency, about images that are not only of betrayal of basic humanity now, but hot those victims and survivors for years, indeed, for decades throughout the lies. because the internet is invested with these images that simply don't go away. for children who become adults, they are a continuing message. i began these efforts some 15 years ago when i was attorney general in the state of connecticut, when i sought to stop predators from exporting chilled on my space, which is more for the history books no more than for parliament. this problem is as old as

civilization but it has been given new file force by an internet that not only spreads but preserves those images. what i learned 15 just ago is that there is a section of law, section 230 of the communications decency act, that provides unique, near absolute immunity from legal responsibility for certain companies and activity. and we are not proposing to eliminate that kind of protection from liability that are deserved and earned by companies that follow good basic practices to stop those predators from exploiting

children. and exploiting also the internet and the power that it provides. we are simply seeking to crack down on child abuse and exploitation, and to enlist those companies in this effort, and to make sure they follow good practices. over the past decade, in fact, technology has advanced, and it has provided tools that preserve privacy and enable encryption, but at the same time afford these tech companies the opportunity to do tremendous good simply by reporting child abuse and exploitation materials to the national center for missing and exploited children and law enforcement authorities. this problem can be solved.

and yet shockingly, these tech companies, some of them among the largest, with more than ample resources, have failed to meet their social and moral obligation. there was a shocking "new york times" investigative report, tremendously valuable and powerful that indicated that employees provided 2545 reports to ncmec last year. even 4chan, not exactly a paragon of online virtue provided 1380. amazon provided eight. that's right, eight. ncmec sent to amazon 629 reports

-- set 69 reports. ncmec found nearly nine times more abuse material on amazon services then amazon found on its own. in response to a letter that we wrote, flickr davis a thoughtful description -- gave us a thoughtful description of meaningful efforts to build safe into the platform using automated tools amazon said they were thinking about it, but no plan. apparently, the company that can get you packages almost before you order them, provides a little more slowly when it comes to preventing child exploitation. so this bill is not about ending encryption. the tech community has told us that both are possible, that

encryption is fully compatible with preventing child abuse and exploitation material on these internet sites. what that is into and encrypted but they still managed to remove 250,000 accounts each month for suspected child exploitation. that's 6 million accounts deleted per year without degrading the privacy of their act. meanwhile, apple has several unencrypted products including its icloud backup and its email service, they just made 250 reports of offensive material last year. so this bill is not about ending

encryption. and it is also, and i'm going to be very blunt here, it's also not about the current attorney general, william barr. we are quite clear here. william barr gets one vote on the commission that is established under this bill. leader chuck schumer and speaker nancy pelosi each appoint four representatives. the tech companies have representatives as well. the votes on the commission have to be by 14, a 14 majority, out of 19. 19. so there is clearly a need for consensus. the attorney general, whoever she or he is, has the power that is purely negative. she or he cannot promulgate any best practice not supported by

this bipartisan consensus on the commission, and a majority in congress. and i want to say, finally, many technologies already are doing the right thing. many of the smallest tech companies are following best practices, , trying to do the right thing. more resources should be provided to law enforcement. i am always in favor of more resources, to the department of justice and the ncmec, and others that help the tech companies do the right thing and enforce against these predators. but this blanket near absolute immunity is not an absolute right. it's not a gift. it should be earned and

deserved. and certainly should not be continuing if these companies failed to observe and follow the basic moral obligation that they have under the law, but as a simple, matter of simple morality. one of the compass doing the right thing is going to testify today, and i applaud the match companies leadership, mr. site is here. i've been heartened by their willingness and again some of the smaller tech companies, some of the innovators and startups to engage with me and senator graham, and together i look forward to continuing these conversations. i want to thank all of the witnesses for being here today. i do want to look back in 15 years from now and say, we could have saved the lives that have been damaged or destroyed in the meantime. we need to do something now. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator feinstein, would you

like to -- >> just a gentle, and i will put my remarks in the record -- general comment. i'm a mother and grandmother, mr. chairman. seven children. nothing enrages me more than sexual abuse of children, and the tech companies of the state of represent that i am so proud to represent, not use this method of promotion to do this kind of thing. and it is horrendous. it is destroying young children. the "new york times" just sad that the number of reported photos, videos, and other materials related to online child sexual abuse grew by more than 50% last year. case closed, mr. chairman. i'm proud to support this legislation.

>> thank you. we will begin the hearing now. nicole, would you come forward please. have a seat, ma'am. nicole -- >> tell her how harmless we are, to relax. >> you are in good hands, nicole. nicole a mother of a survivor whose sexual exploitative images have been widely circulated on a variety of internet websites and social media platforms. nicole was able to seek invaluable and emotional support from knickknacks team hope, a peer support group composed of parents whose children had been missing or exploited. welcome to the committee, and if you would mash the red button. thank you for coming to talk with us. >> thank you for having me here if you get a little close and thought into the mic, thank you. >> thank you for having me. good morning chairman graham,

ranking member feinstein and members of the committee. i am pleased to be a divide a paris perspective on the introduction of the earn it act and why this bill is crucial in addressing child sexual exploitation that affects so many children and their families including my own. my name is nicole and i'm the mother of the survivor whose exploitative images have been widely secondly on a ride of internet websites and social media platforms. i'm here today because i firsthand knowledge of how sexual abuse material impacts children and families to my child's biological father produce sexually abusive photos starting with our child was five years old, and shared his images on the internet. we are fortunate my child abuse was arrested and also the rest of his life in jail. not all children are lucky enough to see justice served. through this experience i learned about the world of online child sexual exploitation that i never knew existed. at first i did not comprehend the repercussions from my

child's abuse of interesting unlike of my initial reaction was released, that the images would prove what he had done and would help prosecute him. it never occurred to me that just because he was is gone, te images were not. it was devastating to learn that my child's abuse continued to be redistributed online, , we victimize the my child every single time. i have been told at one point these images with the most highly trained in the world and even today a decade later the images are still being traded in seeing a new cases. i do not understand how with all the technology available today that are not safeguards to prevent distribution and redistribution of a child sexual abuse of images. how can these images continue to be uploaded and shared distributed for years on internet without companies doing anything? and more so what are the companies not that held accoune for what is occurring on their sites works according to the terms of service of most sites they own all content uploaded by

the users. they needed help accountable for that ownership. every single company the host user uploaded content is responsible for identifying and removing and reporting all child sexual abuse material known and unknown. companies who do not do this are complicit in the abuse and need to be held accountable just like -- i'm hopeful the earn it act will get companies to be more responsible and do more to protect children and will punish companies that refuse to step up. i'm also hopeful companies will also take steps to identify the live stream of child sexual abuse and the grooming behavior. there is a need for this. technology could actually be used to prevent future child abuse. i am so appreciative of the sponsors of this bill are changing the term from child pornography to child sexual abuse material. it makes it clear to society what this crime really is, the sexual abuse of a child, and the

harm that it causes. thank you, senator graham and blumenthal for introducing this bill and thank you to the committee for supporting it in being here today. this bill is about the safety of kids and there's nothing more important than protecting them. >> thank you. i was horrified to learn that your child was found on 168,000,

4074 files four files in possession of thousands of offenders before it was stopped. images were captured over seven years of abuse. those images should never have been on facebook, instagram or wikipedia. there is no place on the internet for this kind of truly repugnant material. and just as important, your child's abuse should have been caught and flagged for law enforcement with the very first image. that's the standard that we should aim to meet, in my view. so our goal today is to find better ways to stop the scourge that affected you personally. and i wonder if you can tell us a little bit more about how the prolonged life of these images

have an effect on individuals who are victims and survivors? >> every time the images are distributed, redistributed, viewed, the child is revictimize. just because the abuse was over at in our case the perpetrator is behind bars, he serving a life sentence, doesn't mean it stops. they are afraid for their safety. they are afraid of being recognized. afraid of it harming their future because these images, as widely as they can be distributed, or always there. they never go away. there's always the fear that they are not safe anymore. >> so it's not just stopping the abuse or the exportation. the images have life of their own. >> yes. >> the companies -- unless the

companies do more to crack down on the. >> correct. >> thank you. thank you very much. >> appreciate very much and we will have the next panel come forward, please. thank you. if you could all rise, please. raise your right hand. [witnesses were sworn in] >> so we have four people on the panel. mr. john shehan, the vice president for the exploited children division at ncmec. he's responsible for ncmec's

operations relating to sexual crimes committed against children including online child pornography, enticement, and other instances of child sexual exploitation. jared sine, , chief legal officr and secretary of match group where he is responsible for all legal, compliance and government affairs functions for match group on a global basis. mary leary, professor at catholic university where her scholarship, criminal procedure, criminal law and contemporary victimization. she focuses on the exploitation and abuse of women and children, and a marginalization of that group. she serves as the chairman of the victim advisor group to the united states senate and commission. she is a former federal prosecutor a director of the national center for the prosecution of child abuse.

elizabeth banker is deputy general counsel at internet assocation. ms. banker has advised technology companies for more than 20 years on content on modernization, online safety, law enforcement response. she has spent a decade at yahoo! inc. where she was associate general counsel for global law enforcement security and safety. welcome to you all. we'll start with mr. shanahan. >> good morning chairman graham, ranking member feinstein, and members of the committee. thank you for inviting the national center for missing and exporter children, or ncmec, to appear before you today. i'll look for to sharing my perspective on the state of child sexual expectation online and ncmec's support for the earn it act. my name is john shehan on the vice president of exploited child division at at ncmec. ncmec is a private nonprofit organization that serves as a congressionally designated

clearinghouse on missing and exploited children issues. our mission is to find missing children, reduced child sexual exportation and prevent child victimization. one of our core programs is to combat child sexual exploitation through the cyber tip line which receives reports on top sexual exploitation from the public and electronic service providers. every day ncmec bears witness to the constant flow of horrific child sexual abuse material flooding into the cybertek line. since we created the cyber tip line almost 22 years ago, it has it has received more than 65 million reports. the volume of reports has increased exponentially over the years and images, videos and of the content in support has also increased. in 2019 ncmec received almost 17 million reports containing over 69 million suspected child sexual exportation images, videos and of the reporting content. as the volume of reports and abuse of continent has increased so as the complexity of the reporting content.

a 20 2017-2018 videos of child sexual abuse reported to the cyber tip when increased by 541%. last year, 41 million videos of children being sexually abused and exploited were reported. increased use of chat messenger services has led to reports that combine offenders, enticing children online for sexual acts with a distribution of child sexual abuse material. and often those cases involved the infliction of sexual blackmail, or sex torsion. ncmec has seen that any online service that enables member of the public to share content can and will be misused by offenders to abuse children and distribute the sexual abuse of content online. in our experience some leading technology companies such as facebook, google, twitter and snap engage in voluntary and proactive efforts to detect and report child sexual exploitation but too many companies are not

proactive in fighting this problem. they engage in half measures, failed to produce big and voluntary initiatives or information sharing opportunities. they too often put child protection second to organizational financial and broader liability concerns. in our view volunteer effort are not sufficient to combat the overwhelming volume of online child sexual abuse. too many companies fail to participate. more is needed to incentivize tech companies to adopt consistent best practices come to detect, report and remove child sexual exploitation. these guidelines should include screening effectively for child sexual abuse material using, and available technology and best practices to detect and report this content. being legally responsible to child victims went esp recklessly circulates sexual abuse of content online and increasing the number of esp is registered and consistent reporting to the cyber tip line. there's also important to note funding to combat this issue has failed to keep pace with the

explosive volume and complexity of online shop sexual abuse to congress must ensure each entity that handles, analyzes and investigate reports of child sexual exportation exploitatiod adequately. this includes ncmec. the earn it act as a child protection bill. it addresses many gaps, shortcomings and inconsistencies in how online child sexual abuse is currently combated. most significant when this bill will create a unified roadmap of specific up-to-date consistent best practices developed by expert commission. these best practices will guide esp is in combating child sex abuse. the current piecemeal approach used by esp's has failed to adequately respond to the problem. it would require child sex trafficking and online enticement children for sexual acts will be reported by esp's to the ncmec cyber tip line and it will also ensure the sanitized term child pornography is replaced with child sexual abuse material in the criminal code. this revision is it in clearly

significant to the families and survivors that we serve. in conclusion want to thank you for giving ncmec the opportunity to appear before the committee and allowing me to share my experience in combating online child sexual exploitation. ncmec is practice or the earn it act which will incentivize companies to adopt consistent best practices in the fight against online child sexual exploitation. we look for to what you with the committee on efforts to keep children safe and sexual exportation online. >> good morning, chairman graham, ranking member feinstein, and members of the committee. before i begin to ask my full statement be made part of the record and i will briefly summarize my comments here. i am jared sine from chief legal officer for match group, a dallas-based online company that owns a portfolio of companies that operate a variety of popular online dating sites in the u.s. and abroad. some of the brands members of the committee when many cases your single staff members may be familiar with our tinder, match.com, okcupid and hinge.

i appreciate the bipartisan invitation to be a today come to discuss our support of the earn it act. match thanks chairman graham, ranking member feinstein, senator blumenthal and other supporters of this legislation for the courage and foresight to develop the constructs of this bill. we are supporting similar legislation in the uk and we think this is a construct that effectively promotes collaboration between industry, law enforcement, leading experts and others. it is not only workable, it has the ability to both auster innovation and act aggressively and effectively against child online exportation of protecting the privacy rights of the users. the earn it act is a serious attempt to have the internet ecosystem tackle big, complex, societal issues in a way that bounces protecting kids with legitimate privacy concerns. this bill takes on the right central question, how all of us in the ecosystem reviews are safe from bad actors while

ensuring the privacy? the consequences of doing nothing are both unacceptable and terrifying. the advent of smart phones and apps has coincided with skyrocketing rates of depression and suicide among the countries young people. it's time to recognize the impact that the internet and digital, and digital native generation are having on all of our nation's families regardless of their shape or size. unlike other services our business does not rely on monetization of user data or viral post. our business depends on our users having a safe and enjoyable experience. match group recognize the dangers of online communities were minors and adults are allowed to cominco because why we voluntarily made the choice to restrict the use of our platforms to all users 18 and older and is why we did deploy extensive resource to plot under age users identify and remove bad actors and bad content from our platforms. kids are not equipped to step out groomers in the game for the

traffickers from the tweeters. while we applaud the efforts of techno to compass across the globe who are working to try to address these problems, more must be done. the earn it act will not single-handedly solve all of these issues but it serves as aa clarion call to action for all technology companies. because there is one unavoidable reality at the court of the internet today. all platforms can and must do more to protect our children. section 230 has been a critical part of the internet's rise in success, and must be kept strong and vibrant. however, we do not believe that companies who do nothing to stop child exploitation should receive the benefit and trust that section 230 has long granted them. match group takes a privacy of our users seriously which is what all of brands are required to meet the rigorous standard of the general data protection regulation in the eu. like all internet companies we grapple with the same inherent tensions that exist between privacy and safety. we believe these issues are not

mutually exclusive, especially when it comes to our support of the earn it act. there are technological solutions that balance safety for our children and privacy, and we need to work to enable the commission and help develop the solutions. that is the point of the commission. its ability to collaborate, to solve these issues, taking into account the ecosystem, its needs and the rights of its users and providers to drive a solution that works for everyone. we do not take our support of this proposal lightly and i look forward to sharing with the committee ideas for strengthening the proposal. however, we believe the proposed legislation has a billy to do just that. by balancing those needs of safety and privacy through collaboration. as part of the standard-setting process the commission established by the earn it act must be empowered and instructed to take these tensions into account. it is time we all have some skin in the game to protect our children. platforms, gatekeepers, app

stores, social media, browsers and the rest of the internet ecosystem must do more. we at match group what to do more as well. which is why we're rolling out newer and better technologies to address the threats of today and look around the corner of the safety challenges of tomorrow. my full statement details the state initiative that match its rolling out. thank you. >> thank you very much. professor leary. >> good morning chairman graham, ranking member feinstein, and members of the judiciary committee. thank you for inviting me to join you today to be involved in this important discussion about child sexual abuse material. it is indeed grown in severity and numerical over the last several decades, and match the attention this to me has given over the last over years. let me be clear, i am here to testify i had in favor of or against the earn it act. i if you're as a witness list that if the issues of exploitation of children as an academic and has worked directly on them as a former prosecutor in both the state and federal level. i hope to offer some historical and practical context to the

problems of child sexual exportation. i first want to commend the committee for elevating the voices of the victim survivors. the experience of survivors of this type of exploitation really captures the full scope of the horrors and it is my belief having studied the issue of 15 or 20 years ago that experience had been heard rather than acknowledge and moved on to other business concerns, we wouldn't be in the position that we are today. i would first like to comment on the term child sexual abuse material. i want to be clear that from an academic perspective as well as prosecutorial perspective, this is more than mere semantics and want to commend you for having the united states joined the rest of the world in that kind of a label. not only does it remove the sanitized label child pornography that previously existed, but it is something else very important in the criminal law. as this committee will no reply get on the first year of law

school, a crime is a voluntary act that causes a social harm. this label indicates clearly what that social harm is. as nicole testified earlier indicated this is uniquely pernicious harm. i used to say the victims when i talked with them, it's the crime in perpetuity, unlike any other crime. this label captures that and it also reflects the social harm the supreme court has said since his earliest case in the space as well as the united states congress. sexualization and a radicalization of minors encourages societal perceptions of children as sexual objects leading to further sexual abuse and exploitation. congress said that in 1996 and it was indeed prophetic. i'd like to touch quickly on the mens rea discussion in this bill. let me disabuse anyone of the notion that recklessness is a low standard. in the criminal law,, recklessness remains a very difficult standard to meet as a

victim survivor must establish that the actor consciously disregarded a risk that his conduct would cause this pernicious harm. and moreover, that any -- the risk must be substantial and unjustifiable and at risk is evaluated by considering the nature and purpose of the actors conduct in the circumstances known to the actors time. and for the recklessness standard involves a gross deviation of the standard of conduct from a law-abiding person. given the need for deterrence in this space, the practice that appears to disregard no identifiable risks of children, this seems a very obvious step forward. i would like to highlight when unresolved challenge that may be present in this legislation and is worthy of further discussion perhaps. as of this committee well knows, congress acted in 2018 and similar issues regarding sex

trafficking. on the part of the united states congress was due to an issue that was taking place on the ground in the courtroom. victim survivors were being denied access to justice because bad actors and back pages, the worst example of this, but i'll use it as an example, were using section 230 not for what congress intended it for, not as the shield but as a sword. those of us who study the issue feel it was a strategy designed to not let their internal document be made public. and that was that a aa motion o dismiss stage where discovery is not yet taken place, the cases were getting dismissed. congress stepped in and as result of that has resolved that problem here with that being said it should be noted that under this legislation, a party will obtain protection if they can establish a reasonable basis to conclude that review does not

reveal any material noncompliance with best practices. would argue that is a fairly easy standard to meet, and if the standard is met, , we run te risk to once again at the motion to dismiss stage will not ever be getting access to internal documents which may in some instances show criminal activity with regard to my further comments i welcome any questions. thank you. >> thank you very much. ms. banker. >> chairman graham, ranking member feinstein, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today at this important hearing. my name is elizabeth banker. an deputy general counsel at internet assocation. i asked my full statement be included in the record. we appreciate you made eradication of child exploitation of priority. it's also a top priority for our member companies. these horrific crimes against

children are most vulnerable and precious population are unconscionable. i would also like to knowledge nichols incredibly brave testimony. thank you for sharing your families story. it's an important reminder of the human cost of the crimes we are discussing today. i've worked on these issues within industry since 1999, collaborate with ncmec, law enforcement, industry, and nonprofits dedicated to solving this problem. my work required that i review images of child sexual abuse for reporting purposes. it is difficult to express the needed and fundamental change i experienced from seeing evidence of these crimes. any person with even an ounce of empathy feels the pain of the child pictured on a visceral level. it is actually difficult part of much of which only continued because i believe that by doing so, i could play a role in

protecting, if not that child, then other children from those crimes. similarly, thousands of people working on this issues at ia member companies are extraordinarily committed to fighting this content. despite companies support, they pay a personal toll, and it would not do the work if they did not believe it plays an important part in safeguarding children. today, ia member companies alongside governments, civil society and other stakeholders continually work to stop the spread of child exploitation. for example, ia members dedicate engineering resources to the development of tools like photo dna and match. they donate tools to nonprofits and others in in the industry d engage with law enforcement. many companies proactively detect and then report instances of child exploitation and ncmec. ia has concerns the bill would

tinder existing efforts to keep the platform safe or worse, it would undermine the efforts of law enforcement to hold bad actors to account. our chief concern is the bill would exacerbate a growing trend among criminal defendants charged with child exploitation in which a attempt to suppress evidence but arguing that providers who proactively detected child exploitation and reported it to ncmec acted as agents of the government for fourth amendment purposes. today, courts generally viewed as efforts as voluntary. if the government led commission adopts best practices which require companies to take specific actions, or else face heightened risk of liability, it becomes more likely that courtsl find the companies to be acting as agent of the government. this would create a worse case scenario. in which criminal defendants

could not be prosecuted using the child exploitation evidence found through provider detection efforts. it would make material discovered on companies services useless as evidence. even if that does not occur, this litigation diverts important enforcement resources that would otherwise be able to take on additional cases. similar concerns related to the first amendment are outlined in my written testimony, and i would be happy to discuss indiaf those with the committee. the earn it act also leaves open the possibility that the condition can be use as a vehicle to regulate encryption, an issue with a broad set of stakeholders and such significant impact for the national interest that only congress in an open and transparent manner should set policy. with respect to ending child exploitation, ia member companies believe that congress can pass legislation with an

immediate positive impact on the fight against child exploitation without taking on constitutional issues, regulations, and concerns about disturbing the white balance that congress has struck. we see many vehicles to do that in the earn it act, including allowing for the development of new tools for detection, improving the quality and consistency of cyber tips and existing law enforcement investigative efforts, and we would like to continue work with the committee to address those. ia at our member company stand ready to work with this committee and other willing partners to end child exploitation. i look forward to taking your questions. >> thank you. i will just pick up where you ended up and talking and talking and nothing is happening, so i don't buy anything you just said about the tech companies and internet ecosystem really caring. all they care about is just not getting sued. so if you had a choice, if you

had a choice between losing your 230 protections or to earn it built, which you want when it comes to child sexual abuse, ms? [inaudible] >> microvote. >> chairman graham, i don't think that we need to make the choice order to protect children. children. i think there -- >> i think it's failing and you think it's working, right? [talking over each other] >> is it working? >> it needs improvement. >> okay. why does facebook have 15.8 million reports, and who is it? amazon has eight. >> chairman graham, i can't speak to what any particular one -- >> ms. banker, can you explain that? >> circa facebook is a gold standard. they are taking tools and a

permanent them across the entire platform. >> what would you say amazon is in terms of metals? >> there at the bottom of the bill. even the example you gave earlier, 69 notices from ncmec to amazon regarding child sexual abuse content they were hosting, they submitted eight reports. they are at the bottom in the sense that may not even be compliant with 2058 the mandatory reporting law. >> deeply the current system is working? >> there is a ton of room for improvement. there are a small number of companies that are going above and beyond but the vast majority could be doing much more. >> mr. sine, you're in this business. what do you think? >> i think there's a lot we can and should be doing, and the reality is i i think if compans are worried about the standards, that worries me. ultimately i think comfort should be taking it on themselves to do this but were not worried about the commission of like-minded and like focused folks getting together to try and tackle this issue. >> you do this on your own? >> we did.

>> do you welcome more input. >> we do. we have own match group advisory council, of which members from ncmec are part of, members of rain are part of the commission as well as ms. burke, the founder of the #me too movement. we take the input and advice and are able to use that to allow new features for use to keep them safe like a recent feature called moonlight which is in real time panic button helps to protect our users it to find himself in an emergency situation. >> professor leary can use something that stuck out to me. you said if we listen in 1998 and actually have done something about victims we may not be here. is that what you said? >> that is what i said. >> this is 2020. i am listening. should we do more? >> well, i think it's clear that we should do more and i think the best example that would be this committee is hearing this summer where i think most of the panelists made it very clear that the problems of explosion

of child sexual abuse and images are not a collateral side effect of the internet but, in fact, some argued come some scores of argued it is the cause of the business model of some of these companies come that it incentivizes, incentivizes this kind of behavior and there's money to be made when one does not pay attention to these issues. >> mr. shehan, the national district attorneys association, the national sheriffs association all support this effort are to believe law enforcement needs help in this area? >> absolutely. yes, they do. they are underresourced. these are very technical crimes to investigate. they are emotionally draining on law enforcement as well. we need to take care of them from a number of standpoints. mental health, they did have those services so your longevity for law enforcement in these careers and also the training and expertise on how to handle these but they're overwhelmed as it is now and we know that our

only more instances to find by the tech come is using these tools. we need to invest in law enforcement and have the ready to respond. >> ms. banker, appreciate what you've done. i don't mean to be rude to you but there's just a real disparity between what's happening in your industries and want to work with you to fix it. is section 230 a constitutional right? [inaudible] >> that wasn't my question. is it the constitutional right or is a something confiscate take away if he chooses? >> it is a law passed by congress. >> and we can change it if we like. thank you. senator feinstein. >> i just have a hard time understanding how people defend this. last month the "new york times" recounted that the number of reported photos, videos, and other materials related to

online child sexual abuse grew by more than 50%. how does this happen in this country? mr. shehan. >> certainly a global problem. many of these platforms are used by individuals all around the world so it's not just u.s. citizens who are uploading child sexual abuse material onto these platforms. its people all around the world. even the 17 million reports we had to our cybertek line laster, 93% 93% involved individuals outside of the united states, exploiting these u.s. platforms. as such we are providing these reports to law enforcement all around the globe. we truly are just starting to scratch the surface if you move away from the top ten, top 15 companies that that are reported, it really nosedives and there's a major companies that could be doing a lot more. what were looking at now could only continue to grow it all of the companies truly harness these technologies and start

looking and finding and removing this content. >> mr. sine, would you like to comment on that? >> look, we agree with mr. shehan the companies can and should be doing more which is why in our platforms many of our platforms like tinder and hence we don't allow private image distribution because we prefer speed is let me ask. are you comfortable with the way things are? >> definitely not. >> that's what it want to know. you would be open to this bill? >> we support this bill. >> good. >> thank you very much. i thought your comments were very, very good and right on point. what's amazing to me is that anybody should have a resistance to this. this is children we're talking about. they have every right, or should have, to be protected. why do you think this has been taken such advantage of? just because it sells?

>> well, i will say that i think early on, , if i could get mysef a little bit too back when i was a prosecutor, explaining to courts, to jurors, to the public the uniquely pernicious harm of child sex abuse material required some work. it was really understood. we had situations where judges would say, just looking at pictures. we've come a long way now. part of that is because the images are so egregious, so to quote senator blumenthal, so stomach churning that is captured peoples attention. why does it continue? it continues, i use a line from a closing argument. criminal activity in this space is limited only by the perverted imagination of offenders. and in this case the child sexual abuse is ample fight and magnified by a business model that profits directly or indirectly from the exchange of

these images. >> i thank you for that. and i thank you, mr. shehan, for what you are doing. i think it's a very, very important. i . i understand that you have received nearly 17 million such reports in 2019. is that correct? >> yesterday has. >> does the center of staff processed the volume? how do you do it? >> we're doing the best that we can. we are understaffed, underfunded. there are less than 30 analysts that are working their tails off to process and analyze the cyber tip line reports. you do the quick math and it's impossible. it's impossible to put eyes on every single report. the vast majority of internationally-based internationally-based reports, the ones that need to go overseas, unfortunately we're not putting eyes on. our first priority is to miss the cases and those are in the hundreds of thousands. we use technology, companies like -- the committee, make sure from a data perspective there's nothing that slips through the cracks. where always trying to identify

children are at risk as highest priority but the ball the in the staffing ratio is of great concern and would welcome additional resources in the future to address it. >> i appreciate that and i'd like to make myself available to help in any way i possibly can. and it just want to complement you, mr. chairman, and the senator on our side that is headed this. it's a giant step forward and very important. so thank you very much. >> thank you very much. senator thune the. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you for calling this hearing, and thank thank you, r blumenthal, wherever you are, for offering this bill. i just asked my office mate to sign up as a co-author. i want to move past the issue of the commission and talk about possible solutions. i'd like you to answer my question respectfully with specificity. we understand the problem.

i want to talk specifically to the point, meat on the bone about specificity. ms. banker, if you could tell me in 30 seconds the specific things that should be done to solve this problem. >> thank you centrally. i believe the most impactful thing we could do now is to pass legislation that would specifically allow companies to use what is otherwise criminal material to develop new detection technologies using artificial intelligence and machine learning. >> anything else? >> i think resources for ncmec, law enforcement and victims assistance programs is also very helpful. >> anything the companies can do better? >> well, the companies want to build better detection technology, and currently they would be prevented from being

able to do so. in addition, i think the changes to the reporting statute that are in the earn it act -- >> i want to give everybody a chance. i apologize for being rude. specifically, mr. shehan. >> i think we need greater widespread adoption of tools that even currently exist. there are tools -- >> i i agree. how do we do that? >> greater transparency. >> i love transparency. how do we do that? >> that's where you have to get to. when the "new york times" covered the fact the greatest of photo dna don't even use it across the entire platform -- >> i know that i'm not trying to be rude. i want to hear specifically we should do in the next 30 days to fix this. >> i think we're headed in that direction to give incentives -- >> mr. sine, specifically, i think what we can do is pass a law like this. >> other than that.

other than that. >> other laws that require technology companies to use a i assisted with you. that's what we use at our company. >> what we said to our friends in the broadband internet community, look, we're going to give you a reasonable amount of time to fix this problem, or substantially reduce it, using the authority that you have. and if you don't, we're going to pull section 230 protection. would that do it? >> i think a lot of people would move a lot faster. >> okay. and maybe we could do it in stages. >> sure. companies will not -- >> i'm not talking years. i think some of our companies are doing a good job. i think some to do a better job, but some people respond to light. others respond to heat.

and i bet if we took away the 230 protection, they would both feel light and heat. professor. >> thank you, senator. there is a robust discussion about a lot of things that could be done and you touch on the -- >> tell me specifically. >> specifically, one is to revisit 230 in its entirety or whether not it should exist at all in the modern age or if they should be substantially adjusted to reflect the current space in which we live. >> how would you substantially adjust it? >> i would share with you one suggestion from the national association of attorneys general to deal with this did not issue and that suggested the years, and i don't work for them so i may get the quote that exactly right, but to clearly allow not just -- and enforcement of state laws across the board as not being affected by section 230. that would be important because in the area of child sexual

exploitation, we need multiple pressure points. this is a complex problem. state, private rights of action, federal action are all helpful. i think in that context it would also solve a side effect of section 230. >> let me stop you for a second because i don't want to go over. i'm all for the commission. i think it's a great idea. .. >> senate will come to order. the parliamentarian will read a communication to the senate . >> march 30, 2020, to the senate.

under the provisions of rule one, paragraph three of the standing rules appoint the honorable lisa murkowski, senator from alaska to perform the duties of the chair . signed chuck grassley, temper president pro tempore. >> in the previous order the senate stand adjourned until 10 amthursday, april 2, 2020 . >> i want to associate myself with what you said, this bill was a balanced approach and i'm open-minded to the idea . >> i am glad you're having these hearings . i applaud what you have done and senator blumenthal has done and incidentally, i expressed my worries that the department of justice wasn't here but i understand you're

going to have a law enforcement panel and they are to be heard from. the number of incidences reported by the tech companies is exposed in recent years and i think it's 40 to 45 million last year, is that correct denmark. >> 17 million reports but45 files . >> the leads referred to national taskforces increased by 420 percent between 2010 and 2018. arrests have gone up very slightly. they actually decreasesome in 2018 . and that same year only 660 criminal defendants in the whole country were federally prosecuted for sexual abuse for offense against minors. i think there are probablyan awful lot more cases than that . i would ask mister chair,

what accounts for the disconnect? what can we do in congress to assure this growing number of tips and referrals received by law enforcement not all over the country to make sure they go into prosecution? >> as a former prosecutor i'd like to see especially against minors that the hammer comes down. >> absolutely and by and large there needs to be more real sources for law enforcement to investigate these cases. they are inundated with cyber tips alone and you'll hear the crimes against children task force members mention how they can't do proactive work or are struggling to respond to other cases the cause of cyber tips so they need more funding for training and mental health care as well. >> i saw that the commission created by this legislation is going to go into mister chairman, it's a difficult

issue as we go through encryption,innovation . as senator blumenthal knows, competition, privacy, free-speech online. if thecommission fails to agree on best practices , then the standard of civil liability drops to recklessness. and with technology which is changing by the day, no case law to guide the courts.i'm worried what constitutes recklessness for a tech company is only going to be a guessing game so mister sine and miss baker, how would this recklessness entered affect you or your businesses ? >> from our perspective and we've spoken with the staff

of the chairman and senator blumenthal about this. we believe the appropriate standard is knowledge but we believe that our reckless standard is one that in this instance, i'm a father of five kids i've got two-year-old at home and a 13-year-old teenager . i think it's something we should be able to mitigate the rest of the liability associatedwith that, this is an important topic . >> thank you. we do have concerns that recklessness standard would be unpredictable in this space. i think we would all agree that anyone instance this type of material being found on theprovider system is too many .and in light of that, it's difficult without having any case law or other references available to understand what reasonable measures would be. and what would be considered reckless by a court . >> we looked at the 10

circuits acumen decision, i think judge neil corsets wrote it. if tech companies are effectively required by government-backed commission to search private commissioners information , any evidence derived from that maybe ruledinadmissible . through the fourth amendment. absent a warrant also concerns me. senator and as a former prosecutor, i understand many of you have different views but what, how do we answer the people who are concerned commission could run afoul of justice gore such opinion acumen? does anybody want to trythat ? >> now take a stab at that. a couple of points on the first amendment, the acumen case stands alone and the

case on it is focused on the national center. it's important to note cases across the country in general as to the isps have not found them to be state actors . a special point about the fourth amendment issue and it's a complex one is the first amendment, the very question is such a good one deals with tension that we always have with the first amendment between privacy and security. therein lies the tension but the fourth amendment is designed to help us inform policy when we're in this place , not to say this will be difficult and i know this is not the course of your question but i've seen this in the debate where we can't even talk about it because there is no case law. i think as i read the bill that's exactly what the commission will be discussing as well as many other implications, technology, etc. to figure out these first amendment issues but i think it is far from certain this will transform a provider into a government actor if they voluntarily

choose to follow best practices that they help to develop with their colleagues in the field. >> i have another question mister chairman if i might submit it for the record. >> absolutely and maybe the simple thing is to let the civil justice system work this out. just sue and if you winyou when and if you lose you lose . senator cornyn. >> thank you misterchairman for convening this important hearing . we've done as some of you have noted important work eliminating the back pages of the world. protect our children act that senator blumenthal and ilet on and as well as the cyber line . the one that senator feinstein and i worked on. but i understand professor you address a question with regard to the outright repeal of section 230 immunity and i had to be in the finance committee . could you address that again smr why not do that?

>> i did not offer an opinion as to why not to do it or do it, i simply in my prior answer tried to say there's a full spectrum in the academic and advocacy world about how to address this problem and they extend from section 230 absolutist to taking the view we can never touch it all the way to those who say we should completely repeal it. section 230 was created at a time and and the purpose was there were many purposes but it was particularly unique, there was a nascent internet. in its infancy and the desire was not to impede its growth but at the same time importantly another equally important goal was to reward good samaritans and shield children from objectionable content . >> you'll agree the internet is no longer a nascent enterprise. it's quite mature as we've seen from some of the numbers here in congress has already passed exceptions to that

immunity, correct? in the area of child exploitation . we've seen foreign actors use our internet for information warfare and active measures to createdissension and discord in our democracy in the last election , 2016 so i think that's a real question. why not just repeal the community and let the appropriate legal standard apply whether it's ordinary care or whether it's what we would apply to a publisher. most of the platforms now have admitted i think facebook in particular has admitted that we would no longer consider themselves to be aneutral platform . they actually edit their newsfeed. and just like, i don't understand why they shouldn't be treated like apublisher for example . you have any observationabout that ?

>> senator, i would say my focus today is on the file location issues as it relates to this question and i think what i would say in that space is you're quite right. we know where we are now and when one looks at the purposes and findings that congress had in section 230 as well as the unique history this particular provision was part of a larger bill, this particular provision was put in in order to balance the larger bill. the larger bill was later found unconstitutional and ironically the tech industry was left with a bonus just the protections so i do think it's fair to revisit that now . over two decades later. >> thank you, mister sine, i appreciate madge being based in dallas. he talked about the measures

you have undertaken for your company has undertaken to protectchildren against exploitation . my simple question is if you're doing it why can't everybody do it? >> we think they can. we do think section 230 is important for smaller to medium size companies may not have the resources and clearly are not opposed to the larger companies having the protection but we think everyone can do it, the technology is out there and it's something that can readily be either shared from other technologies or within the companies themselves. >> maybe this isn't the appropriate time and place to find out but i'd like to know what those financial and other obstacles might be smaller companies that would prevent them from doing what companies like ãis doing. >> we be happy to meet with your staff andhelp share, that would be helpful . >> in texas as in most states if you observe or witness a child abuse, you have a legal

obligation to report you are guilty of a crime. if you don't, why shouldn't that apply to the internet? >> is that a question for me senator ? >> or anybody else who would like to take a stab at it. >> the way we look at it is technology is good and developing but it's only so good in terms of absolutes . we can absolutely guarantee every image that might cross this threshold would be picked up. we again have technology that we believe does a good job of that but never full proof. >> and since my time has run out, i would ask the others to comment on it but i think certainly there's a way for congress to craft a standard that would protect people who act in good faith to try to eliminate the risk and i'm not talking about absolute liability in the event

something happened to slip through thank you mister chairman . >> senator blumenthal. >> thank you misterchairman . and i think that senator cornyn has just articulated the feeling that most parents, most citizens would share that we ought to be able to craft a standard as legislators, some of us as former attorney general senator holly senator cornyn our technology is available to provide better detection so that companies that see something ought to say something. that's a basic obligation of corporate citizenship but basic human decency. and i want to touch on an aspect of this problem that i think is very important for people to understand mister sheehan. the internet association says

all we need is more resources . i agree, more resources devoted to this problem would be beneficial. but perhaps you can tell us why more resources alone are not the answer. >> i think in many respects the resources exist. there are a number of tools out there that companies can use to detect child sexual abuse images, videos and the grooming of children for sexual purposes. what comes down to is due the companies want to implement those tools acrosstheir ecosystem . the new york times recently did a number of series you mentioned them earlier and in their they discovered that the creator of photo dna, the company that created photo dna utilized in their search. it's not used in their cloud services so what is preventing an option within the companywide atmosphere?

you have companies like facebook doing it and proving it can work. the tools exist, they just have to berolled out . >> i think that's an excellent answer . but technological resources exist . they're just not being used by these companies and what we're trying to do here is incentivize companies to make use of resources that exist right now. maybe you can also tell us a little bit about how information can help better stop this abuse as it may be ongoing. >> absolutely. better reporting into the cyber tip line, we provide a number of structured fields that are there and there always excellent reports, elevate real-time situations when a child's life is believed to be in danger but many of the companies are using those fields they're not properly reporting. there were two companies last year that he had to threaten that basically they couldn't improve their reportingwithin 30 days, we were goingto remove their automated access

. they got back one point , there's companies where thousands of reports are coming in on the same individual, the same suspect and law enforcement is being burdened with having to review 1000 reports instead of one area there are much better ways to transmit that information, flagged those situations when a child's life is believed to be in danger sowe can get that information to law enforcement the child can be recovered . >> these are life endangered in real time. >> absolutely, every day we see this. >> but in real time, you can help save lives and stop for predation. >> every week the cases are coming in. where those types of situations are escalated, we're getting into law enforcement and their making arrests within hours and pulling children out of sexuallyabusive situations . >> thank you. miss banker, in response to the letter that senators holly, cornyn, graham and i sent dozens of companies on

their efforts to police child sexual abuse material, facebook wrote us the following. and i'm quoting. we are committed to designing wrong invention, detection and reporting systems to ensure that private and secure messaging services provide users with industry-leading privacy and security. while safeguarding them and others from online abuse. in other words, facebook has told us and to end encryption can coexist. with venting child exploitation. i'd like to ask you and i think it's answerable by a yes, sir a no, i don't think it's a terribly complicated question and i have limited time. his facebook telling us the truth?

are they telling us thetruth ? can end to end encryption coexist with strong safeguards and enforcement against child exploitation, yes, sir no? >> there are other mechanisms that can be used to detect. >> but they are telling us the truth, correct? or are they lying? >> i haven't seen the response but i do know from my own experience working on detection of this type of material that the content is one piece of it. >> i'll take that as a yes. and you are nodding so i will definitely take it as a yes and it's what i understand the truth to be. i've been reading in the press that the earnest act is a secret trip to band encryption. a backdoor to a backdoor. this bill says nothing about encryption. if you found the word in this

bill about encryption? >> no i haven't. >> except it makes clear that privacy interests and cyber security experts are at the heart of this commission and apparently the argument has been made by big tech and its allies any commission cares about child exploitation will necessarilyband encryption . what you just told me i think is very important. strong law enforcement is compatible with strong encryption. i believe it, big tech knows it and either facebook is lying and i think they're telling us the truth when they say law enforcement is consistent with strong encryption read or big tech is using encryption as a subterfuge. to oppose this bill. and i don't think it is all

of the tech industry. in fact match is here today to refute that miss and i believe strongly that in effect big tech doesn't want to lose this absolute blanket immunity and they don't want to haveto do anything to earn it . so i understand, i get it but at the same time, i don't think the american people want this to be a fight about encryption. i think they want the truth and the truth is encryption can coexist with strong law enforcement. i have other questions mister chairman, maybe we will have a second round. >> thank you senator blumenthal . thank you mister chairman and to all of you for being here. c-span is devastated, it's sickening. it's one of those things that we wish didn't exist in our society one of those things at arms told many people in

so many ways. that are so personal and so devastating and it can't be ignored. >> i think everyone of us shares that appalling reaction to it. i think there are efforts that we, all of us congress, members of the public, members of the tech community everyone. can and must do to stem the tide. to stem the tide of c-span and protect the public from all the havoc that creates riyadh as a congress we ought to be looking for solutions to the problem . and we have to be looking for a solution that can both do the job and withstand constitutional scrutiny and make sure that whatever we do causes no harm. the last thing we want to do is undertake something that could unintentionally create

more problems for lead to more of the same problem that we want to create. i'm reminded of the example of the british government when it was operating in india would come times do things that had counterintuitive results read for a while they would purchase cobras, people were dying from cobra bite and when they would pay money thinking that would solve the problem it would kill all the cobras and people were reading cobras in order to create a new profit center. we don't want to breed cobras here. i'm going to start with you, in your testimony you raise concerns, some potential fourth amendment issues. related to the acumen line of cases. you said that increased government regulation and voluntary efforts made by monies may actually result in sex offenders walking free. and there is a state actor issue that we really do need to address. and i also think it's important that we focus on the factthat what congress

can't regulate , congress shouldn't intuitively respond to bysaying if we can't regulate it directly , we can do this or that in order to coerce whatever we want. and create some of the same constitutional and public policy relatedconcerns. can you further elaborate fourth amendment implications of this legislation ? >> absolutely and i'd just like to say that for ia's member companies, that prosecution of these crimes is a priority and that is the reason we are voicing this concern. today in the wake of the acumen case which was about nick being a state actor, criminal defendants across the country have filed motions to suppress evidence. in the criminalprosecution , because they are arguing that the providers who proactively detect the materials and then reported it to nick nick were

acting as agents of the government and it's an illegal search our concern is if this would exacerbate that problem. and today we've been lucky in that i'm not aware of a report that has suppressed evidence of these crimes but your concern that one, the renewed vigor with which criminal defendants will pursue this will hold hold important resources in and investigators, prosecutors and even the company personnel who work on these issues to address litigation at the expense of other cases but that they prosecuted but also that a court may go the other direction and decide to suppress evidence and that really is the worst-case scenario where one of these actual predators would essentially get off scott free.

>> i don't have a lot of time remaining but in the time remaining can you tell me just give me your take in response to the end to end in encryption issue. tell me what impact youthink this bill could have on the security of end-to-end encryption . >> i believe the concern being raised about encryption is an understanding of the types of best practices that are likely to be recommended by the commission. which as we've discussed here at this panel are likely to include a best practice to screen content which may require that content available to the provider in plain text and therefore provider would not be able to implement and to end encryption and still be able to do the certification and potentially also wouldn't be able to qualify for reasonable measures and i

think worst-case scenario would potentially be thought to be reckless and having adopted security technology. from ia's perspective, we think encryption is a vitally important issue as it is protecting children and what we would prefer as if he's this committee continuous workholding hearings and address this issue in an open and transparent way that can take into account all of the significant factors and the nation's interests as a whole with regard to this encryption question. >> thank you mister chairman area senator blackburn. >> thank you mister chairman. nicole, i want to say thank you to you for coming and being with us today and sharing your story and of course heartbreak that goes along with that. we appreciate that you are here and fs are leery, i have to tell you i appreciate your long-term view to this. this is a problem that has grown.

we know that people are going to use every available avenue they can to do bad things and with the advent of technology and especially talking about 98, going from analog to digital which enabled so much of this. and i was leading my state through the analog to digital transition in the mid-90s and remember full well exactly what you are talking about. i think that you all see our intent to deal with platform liability. and responsibility. and accountability. as we talk about protecting children. i'm a mother, i'm a grandmother . that is how i look at these issues and i think shielding these bad actors and criminals is despicable. absolutely despicable.

and miss banker, we don't mean to beat up on you. i hope you don't take it that way, you are the messenger. we realize that but we do realize also that the companies and the internet association play a little bit of turn the other eye. and there are technologies that could have been used and should be used every day that are available to you all and you thought privacy actively. and have pushed back on our efforts to work on privacy and data security. not you individually, the association. and member companies so tell me quickly how you structured any best practices as an association for protecting children? have you all put anything down? are you actively working with any parent teacher groups, any church groups, any school

groups to protect children? what are you aggressively doing to protect children? >> thank you for the question senator blackburn and i'd like to start by noting that ia does support a measure that you have cosponsored. it's the end of child exploitation act which we think will greatly benefit this area because it will allow the creation of new tools as well as -- >> let me interrupt you right there. the online child exploitation act, senator hawley is a cosponsor and senators cortez mastro . that is something we are doing, i'm asking you all as an association, do you have any best practices for protecting children? do you have a toolbox you give parents saying we want

to be a partner in protecting your child online? yes, sir no, have you done that or not ? >> member companies engage in many of those efforts area in fact, the recent announcement of the five countries voluntary principles related to child sexual exploitation material. >> how have you been conducting any training or any engagement with parental groups? to shield children? let me do this adifferent way. mister sheehan , are they working with you all to educate parents? mister sign, are they working with you all to educate parents western mark what kind of participation and support are you getting voluntarily fromthese companies ? >> i'm not aware of what the association used in some material but there are companies that take our education material and promoted online.

we have the kids smart material in the schools. we actively engage the community to better educate. >> so some of their companies are working withyou . and mister sine, i know the tech task force that i'm leading in senator feinstein is working with me on this, it's right here in judiciary committee. senator blumenthal has been an active participant and in this, we've had some great discussions and senator blumenthal sent a letter to the fcc on acouple of things . but i know your chief privacy officer was before us and we talked about the dating apps and the match companies and he talked about some of the proactive steps that you all as a company have been taking and one thing i wanted to follow up with and i know my time is about to expire but i know you all were taking some

steps to provide more tools for women so they could report people that were scam artists, things of this nature. if you will give a quick update on what you're doing to make that a safer environment for women in the online space . >> thank you senator. through our mass group advisory council we take feedback, rolling out tools like thenew light tool which is an emergency panic button arewomen users can use when they find themselves in an uncomfortable situation for an emergency situation to dispatch emergency responders. that came from our work with the mass group advisory council including nick met so we have a number of tools and initiatives that are currently either rolled out or in the process of rolling out . >> my time has expired . >> i want to start my questions by saying to nicole

thank you for being here. thank you for sharing your story and i'm sorry that you had to endure as a mother what you had to endure in your family and it's part of the hope and aim of this legislation is to make sure other peopledon't have to go through that but thank you for being an advocate. this legislation is simple, it's really simple . it says if you want, if these tech companies want the broad blanket protections of section 230 and make no mistake section 230 is how these companies have gotten big and powerful, some have gotten rich to rid the done with special immunity the federal government has given them so if they want that they're going to have to do something for it. they will have to take steps to protect our children online so parents not like nicole, i say this as a father of two small boys don't have to go through what your family went through. they're going to have to earn it and it's interesting to watch these tech companies and their fleets of lobbyists in this building and there many dark groups money groups screamed that the sky is falling and the internet is going to break . we heard all these same

arguments. sometimes the lines are repeated verbatim if you could read the same script over and over. last time i looked the internet was still working and it's a better place now that we have taken on human trafficking online and we can make it a better place by taking on child exploitation online and it is not too much to ask for these big tech companies to do fair parts in order to earn this blanket immunity they have enjoyed as a gift from this government for so long and professor o'leary you ably pointed out the original bargain if you will to the tech companies was they were supposed to intern for moderating certain content they were supposed to get this section 230 immunity but of course the content they were originally supposed to moderate is gone, the supreme court struck that down so they've had free immunity for all these years and have used it to their own purposes so my message is to all of those tech companies

out there who have been saying for years now that you can't possibly touch section 230, that if you do that you will end the internet as we know it, this is a bipartisan bill with bipartisan support and the days of this congress giving out free stuff too big tech without asking or expecting anything in return are coming to an end. they are coming to an end and rightly so because the people of this country, the parents of this country are demanding it and that's exactly how it should be. missing banker, let me come to you. i thought i heard you say to senator leeand maybe i misheard you, i thought i heard you say part of your opposition to this bill is it would make it toohard to prosecute child abusers. did i hear you write western mark . >> yes senator. >> you're telling me you are opposed to a bill that is , if you crackdown, give law enforcement new tools to crack down on actual or exploitative materialbecause it would actually bea gift to

those who are committing the exploitation ?is that the logic , walk methrough that . >> absolutely, right now there are numerous criminal defendants who have filed motions to suppress the evidence of their crimes that were detected by through the proactive efforts of ia member companies. the concern we have is today when the companies go to court and explain in those sequestration hearings how it is that they came to report this material, what they say is that it was completely independent as a decision and it was completely voluntary. >> are you aware of any court attempt to suppress any evidence on these grounds? >> know because the companies are saying this was independent, this was a voluntary decision we made . our concern is that.

>> don't you think there's a little tension between arguing this will make it too difficult to prosecute child abusers essentially and saying what so many of your members have said , that this gives too many tools to prosecutors, that this is a giveaway to prosecutors? here's a statement from one tech group that says the act would give the oj prosecutors a shortcut, would present congress with legal mandates that lawmakers would never pass on their own. that doesn't sound like something that's worried about being too lenient to child abusers, sounds like they're worried it will give law enforcement too many tools so which is it? >> i'm not familiar with the statement. >> let me ask you just about whether you think this is right. is your view of the earn it act would present congress with legal mandates we would be obliged to adopt? because i've read that criticism in a lot of places. whatever the commission says it would automatically be enacted, is that your

understanding of this bill? >> my understanding of the bill is it contains what would be an expedited approval congress for congress to approve best practices submitted by the attorney general after approving the commissions work. >> but it is an approval process, it has to go through the normal presentment process. it's not automatic, is that right? so the commission makes recommendations, they are an advisory panel but this congress has the ability to adopt them or not adopt them. let me ask you about encryption, senator blumenthal touched on this and i've heard it widely repeated in some of these tech groups usually funded i might add by our usual friends facebook and google, they say things like if the ag wants to ban encryption there's no way to stop it, do you agree withthat ? you think that's what this bill does? >> i think it's difficult to predict.

>> do you think this bill bans encryption? >> i do not believe the bill bands encryption. what i believe the bill does is it creates a government led commission that is tasked with directing a broad range of matters and that encryption and its impact could very well come up within the scope of the matters that the commission is charged with directing. >> here's what it sounds like to me is that we've got our friends in the big tech world who will grasp at any straw to oppose this bill. either is toprosecution friendly or not prosecution friendly enough because it's going to make prosecutions tougher. either it's going to undermine privacy or make privacy to talk so the prosecutors can't go after these people. the logic doesn't really hold and i will say it's a little bit rich to hear from the big

tech companies , not you but some of these companies who say that privacy now is such a high value after they have spent years building a business model that takes our data without telling us, sells it without our consent, monetizes it and we get nothing for it so like senator blumenthal i'm a great advocate of end-to-end encryption. it must be able to exist with robust law enforcement and i'm not going to support anything that does not protect the integrity of encryption for users but we've got to find a way to protect children online and i think this bill is a great support area you have additional questions. >> i had some additional questions and i think senator hawley you've stated powerfully points where there is strong bipartisan agreement here that end to end encryption is compatible with the best practices that would be adopted by this commission and professor leary, you've stated very well the initial reasons for section 230. i recognize miss manker you are the messenger here, you are not to be held personally responsible but i think you should take back to your clients a message here and

you're hearing it i think loud and clear that the tech companies big or small can be part of the solution or they will be part of the problem. and they will lose all section 230 protections if they don't become part of the solution here. we are dealing with a challenge that ought to engage every responsible member of our society. every parent as mister sine is and we are. every law enforcement official, every responsible corporation. and i think you will see a whirlwind of opposition to section 230 writ large across the board unless we deal with this solvable problem. i want to address this myth of companies becoming

government agents simply because they follow responsible practices. you know, i've been a prosecutor and i've also been a defense counsel . if some criminal defendant comes into court with a suppression motion saying that a company is acting as a government agent and needs a warrant simply to do what every responsible citizen ought to be doing, if that's the best they'vegot , bring it on. i can tell you criminal defendants make all kinds of motions. some of them totally preposterous and i would put this one at the preposterous end of that spectrum and as you said there's been no decision thatanybody is a government agent simply because they report this kind

of wrongdoing . let me ask you mister sheehan if any organization on earth would want to avoid for the amendment concerns that could hamstring law enforcement, it's probably the one you represent . and i'd like to give you a chance to respond to this kind of argument because you are in this business of protecting children. >> we certainly are and i appreciate you taking the time to ask that question because as the representative who often testifies on behalf of the suppression hearing i am a two to these types of discussions and potential arguments and i can assure you that i've spent a great deal of time exploring that particular topic as we were reviewing and if we had any inclinations or concerns that it could go down this path we wouldn't have supported the bill and certainly if it helps the committee we can have our office of legal counsel meet at another time to dive deeper into this that we do not share those

concerns. >> i think that is an excellent answer and mister sine you don't regard match as a government agent when you use your best practices to report child predation or abuse, do you? >> no senator we do not. >> let me ask you miss anchor because i think we're at risk of unfairly impugning the whole industry here and as mister sine's presence and their active engagement has been a very constructive partner here and so have other internet companies that have come forward. i think we are in danger of impugning and painting with too broad abrush . the internet association holds its self accountable as representing the entirety of the internet economy or at least large companies we

refer to big tech, but obviously i can't help but notice that mister sine representingone of those companies is here . in effect opposing your position so let me ask you did all of the companies that you mentioned at the beginning of your testimony review your testimony here today? >> i think i a member companies have a very shared and strong commitment to protecting children from these types of crimes and i think that there's probably more in common with what i am here to say today than there are differences with what mister sine -- >> are you guessing at that or have you taken a survey among your members ? >> before i a engages we allow our members to know what we are doing and to play a role in shaping our

messages. >> let me ask the question how many of those companies affirmatively approved your testimony today after reviewing it? >> i don't have that number with me off the top of my head i'm sorry. >> yet all the companies you listed in your testimony affirmatively approved the testimony. >> i don't know that they affirmatively approved but they were provided an opportunity . >> let me askyou another question . obviously match is here today, they are a member of your association. would you agree that there are probably other members of the internet association who disagree with your position? >> i would be disappointed to find that out because obviously we do try to represent the 40+ companies that are part of our membership in a way that reflects the varied

interests, buried business models. the variedsizes of all those companies to the best of our ability . >> i'm not going to take too much more time but i do want to ask you this question . the internet association and its members have helped themselves out as leaders. you've indicatedtoday you have no sympathy for this kind of child abuse and exploitation . senators hawley and i along with senators cornyn, graham, hirota wrote to 36 companies. i think they're all members of yourassociation asking the fundamental questions about this topic . from the responses to our letters i agree some companies do take the problem seriously. again, i want to thank, i don't want to paint with too broad a brush here and i am appreciative of those efforts senator graham initially at

the outset talked about facebook and the number of reports they are responsible for giving but some of what those few companies do are in effect being used as cover in my view for some very disturbing failures and as i mentioned amazon made just eight reports. eight reports last year of child sexual abuse material. non-included images or video. in fact during that same time nick spent 69 reports to amazon that its services were suspected of hosting that kind of sexual abuse material and it is not responsible for

it, amazon is responsible. nick is trending five times as many reports on amazon as amazon is sending to that, something is wrong with this picture in my view and frankly, i regard amazon's response as indispensable and insulting. and downright dangerous. and they provided terse non-responses to important questions that their peers and much smaller companies, smaller companies start up innovators were able to answer. amazon claims because it isn't facebook, it doesn't have a child sexual abuse material problem. but it's highly competitors like go daddy and digital ocean provided more reports than amazon so my question to

you is do you think amazon's reporting only eight such instances is appropriate. >> i cannot comment on any one specific company. i would simply note that the reason we are here today is because one, we are committed to protecting children and 2, we want to work with this committee to find the best solutions we can today to this problem. and i speak for the entire ia membership when i say that. with regard to anyone company and how much they report, i don't have the information to know whether or not that reflects the whole of that activity ontheir service .

but we are here today to work with you and we do see opportunities to create new and better detection mechanisms that can improve the ability of all i remember companies to report. >> i welcome your cooperation . sincerely, hope that your association and other companies including amazon will cooperate with us. we have no monopoly on wisdom. i hope we have a common goal. but your suggestion that we have more hearings is not the answer. believe me, it is not the answer. we have hearings and hearings and hearings. and meanwhile, children are victims. of kind of bile, stomach turning criminality.

that nicole told us about earlier. and nicole is not alone. she's had the courage to come forward. and describe her experience area so i really don't want to be here 15 months, let alone 15 years from now again and in the meantime have children go through this kind of experience. and congress is notorious for hearings and delay. on this kind of issue i think what you're seeing is a sense of urgency. and i want to thank my colleagues for joining me in that sense of urgency and i hope it will be fair by the companies that you represent. and i want to thank all of

our panel members for being here today. this hearing has been very valuable and i appreciate your service. thank you. >> thank you to all of the witnesses and with that the hearing is adjourned . >> tonight on the communicators, yelps public policy vice president luther low on digital competition and why he thinks google has betrayed the internet he's interviewed by liam nylund and our reporter for politico . >> bill is securing this traffic to itself and therefore in a sense the

oxygenating the entire world wide web. and stifling innovation and ultimately harming consumers because they are not getting access to the bestinformation from across the internet . >> what the communicators tonight at theeastern . >> weeknights this week, we're featuring book tv programsshowcasing what's available every weekend . next, books from the american worker. first steven greenhouse examines the challenges of american workers ace today and then emily slays compares the economic debate of the 1960s to those happening today in her book great society. after that its author mary gray and her book both work which looks at the workforce that drives amazon, google and other large companies watching tv this weekend every weekend on c-span2. >> television has changed